Meta-Research Perspectives on Verbal Lie Detection.

Verbal lie detection (VLD) research, conducted mainly in the cognitive sciences, examines content-based indicators that differ between truth-tellers and lie-tellers. Following the meta-research approach (examination of the research itself), the current paper aimed to ascertain the current status of VLD research across three components: the search for VLD indicators, VLD coding, and VLD research tracks. It highlights several issues that challenge VLD research; these are discussed, along with suggestions for how to address them. This scrutiny may contribute to a further advancement of the field of VLD research and, as a result, an improvement of VLD practices.

Credibility assessments of alibi accounts: the role of cultural intergroup bias.

Research has shown that judges and jurors are influenced by suspect ethnicity and that they might discriminate against out-group suspects in making decisions. This study examined the tendency to favor in-group members, as predicted by social identity theory, in assessing alibi credibility. Forty Israeli-Jewish and 40 Israeli-Arab participants assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by a suspect who was either Israeli-Jewish or Israeli-Arab. Findings show that participants were more likely to believe the alibi when it was provided by an in-group suspect than by an out-group suspect, supporting intergroup bias in alibi credibility assessments. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

'Please tell me all you remember': a comparison between British and Arab interviewees' free narrative performance and its implications for lie detection.

We examined how much information British and Arab truth tellers and lie tellers volunteer in an initial free narrative. Based on cultural differences in communication styles we predicted that British interviewees would report more details and more complications than Arab interviewees (culture main effect). We further predicted that truth tellers would report more details and complications than lie tellers (veracity main effect), particularly in the British sample (Veracity × Culture interaction effect). A total of 78 British and 76 Israeli-Arab participants took part. The experiment was carried out at a British university and an Israeli university. Participants carried out a mission. Truth tellers were instructed to report the mission truthfully in a subsequent interview whereas lie tellers were asked to lie about certain aspects of the mission. The three hypotheses were supported for details, whereas for complications only the predicted veracity main effect occurred.

Applying the verifiability approach to deception detection in alibi witness situations.

The application of alibi witness scenarios to deception detection has been overlooked. Experiment 1 was a study of the verifiability approach in which truth-telling pairs completed a mission together, whereas in lying pairs one individual completed this mission alone and the other individual committed a mock theft. All pairs were instructed to convince the interviewer that they completed the mission together by writing individual statements on their own followed by a collective statement together as a pair. In the individual statements, truth-telling pairs provided more checkable details that demonstrated they completed the mission together than lying pairs, whereas lying pairs provided more uncheckable details than truth-telling pairs. The collective statements made truth-telling pairs provide significantly more checkable details that demonstrated they were together in comparison to the individual statements, whereas no effect was obtained for lying pairs. Receiver Operating Characteristic curves revealed high accuracy rates for discriminating between truths and lies using the verifiability approach across all statement types. Experiment 2 was a lie detection study whereby observers' abilities to discriminate between truths and lies using the verifiability approach were examined. This revealed that applying the verifiability approach to collective statements improved observers' ability to accurately detect deceit. We suggest that the verifiability approach could be used as a lie detection technique and that law enforcement policies should consider implementing collective interviewing.

Insurance based lie detection: Enhancing the verifiability approach with a model statement component.

PURPOSE: The Verifiability Approach (VA) is verbal lie detection tool that has shown promise when applied to insurance claims settings. This study examined the effectiveness of incorporating a Model Statement comprised of checkable information to the VA protocol for enhancing the verbal differences between liars and truth tellers. METHOD: The study experimentally manipulated supplementing (or withholding) the VA with a Model Statement. It was hypothesised that such a manipulation would (i) encourage truth tellers to provide more verifiable details than liars and (ii) encourage liars to report more unverifiable details than truth tellers (compared to the no model statement control). As a result, it was hypothesized that (iii) the model statement would improve classificatory accuracy of the VA. Participants reported 40 genuine and 40 fabricated insurance claim statements, in which half the liars and truth tellers where provided with a model statement as part of the VA procedure, and half where provide no model statement. RESULTS: All three hypotheses were supported. In terms of accuracy, the model statement increased classificatory rates by the VA considerably from 65.0% to 90.0%. CONCLUSION: Providing interviewee's with a model statement prime consisting of checkable detail appears to be a useful refinement to the VA procedure.

Please be Honest and Provide Evidence: Deterrents of Deception in an Online Insurance Fraud Context.

The present experiment examined whether people could be deterred from lying in an online insurance claim setting. A total of 96 participants were asked to submit a theft insurance claim. Reflecting real life, submitting a claim that went beyond the actual costs of the stolen items was associated with advantages and disadvantages. Two deterrence factors were introduced: asking claimants to provide evidence that they actually owned the stolen items (Evidence Instruction, often used by insurers) and asking participants to read out before starting to submit the claim that they will be truthful (Honesty Statement, not often used by insurers). We also examined at what stage of the interview claimants embedded their lies in their otherwise truthful stories. The honesty statement but not the evidence instruction made claimants more honest, and participants lied more as the interview progressed.

Serial reproduction of traumatic events: does the chain unravel?

Our goal in this paper is to show that a careful analysis of recall accuracy within a serial reproduction chain can add to a detailed qualitative analysis of the reproductions within the chain. The texts we chose are based on newspaper reports concerning current events, which are far from being mundane: reports of tragic events, even traumatic events. The participants were 216 students who were randomly assigned to 54 four-person reproduction chains, 18 for each of three 160-word texts. The reproduction chain is highly dependent on the recall accuracy of the first generation (i.e., the first participant in the reproduction chain). Thus, we argue (and show) that there should be a qualitative difference between chains starting off with a high level of recall accuracy from those starting off with a low level of recall accuracy. Our data-analytic approach is based on trend analysis, which we argue is an apt quantitative, holistic, dynamic, process-oriented type of analysis that is required in such research.

Does the truth come out in the writing? Scan as a lie detection tool.

We tested the accuracy of Scientific Content Analysis (SCAN), a verbal lie detection tool that is used world-wide by federal law enforcement and military agencies. Sixty-one participants were requested to write down the truth, an outright lie or a concealment lie about activities they had just completed. The statements were coded with SCAN and with another verbal lie detection tool, Reality Monitoring (RM). RM discriminated significantly between truth tellers and outright liars and between truth tellers and concealment liars, whereas SCAN did not discriminate between truth tellers and either kind of liar. Implications of the findings for the suitability of SCAN as a lie detection tool are discussed.

Psychophysiological and behavioral measures for detecting concealed information: the role of memory for crime details.

This study examined the role of memory for crime details in detecting concealed information using the electrodermal measure, Symptom Validity Test, and Number Guessing Test. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups: guilty, who committed a mock theft; informed-innocents, who were exposed to crime-relevant items; and uninformed-innocents, who had no crime-relevant information. Participants were tested immediately or 1 week later. Results showed (a) all tests detected the guilty in the immediate condition, and combining the tests improved detection efficiency; (b) tests' efficiency declined in the delayed condition, mainly for peripheral details; (c) no distinction between guilty and informed innocents was possible in the immediate, yet some distinction emerged in the delayed condition. These findings suggest that, while time delay may somewhat reduce the ability to detect the guilty, it also diminishes the danger of accusing informed-innocents.

Credibility judgments of narratives: language, plausibility, and absorption.

Two experiments were conducted in order to find out whether textual features of narratives differentially affect credibility judgments made by judges having different levels of absorption (a disposition associated with rich visual imagination). Participants in both experiments were exposed to a textual narrative and requested to judge whether the narrator actually experienced the event he described in his story. In Experiment 1, the narrative varied in terms of language (literal, figurative) and plausibility (ordinary, anomalous). In Experiment 2, the narrative varied in terms of language only. The participants' perceptions of the plausibility of the story described and the extent to which they were absorbed in reading were measured. The data from both experiments together suggest that the groups applied entirely different criteria in credibility judgments. For high-absorption individuals, their credibility judgment depends on the degree to which the text can be assimilated into their own vivid imagination, whereas for low-absorption individuals it depends mainly on plausibility. That is, high-absorption individuals applied an experiential mental set while judging the credibility of the narrator, whereas low-absorption individuals applied an instrumental mental set. Possible cognitive mechanisms and implications for credibility judgments are discussed.